3 ms·

My point isn't whether or not there is yet scientific evidence of vaccines causing an impact on menstruation, as opposed to the anecdotal evidence mentioned in

My point isn't whether or not there is yet scientific evidence of vaccines causing an impact on menstruation, as opposed to the anecdotal evidence mentioned in the article and by myself above. My point is that scientific researchers seem to look at timescales of 6 months for short term side effects rather than 1 month the GP seems to believe is a hard cut off for short term side effects.

arcticbull 5y ago
Anecdotes aren't useful when the population set is billions. You will be able to find someone who took a COVID vaccine and then X happened. Car crashes, amputations, stillbirths, weddings, job promotions, winning the lottery even. That's just the law of large numbers. They're really not relevant to the discourse - quite damaging actually because of the outsize attention they receive. > My point is that scientific researchers seem to look at timescales of 6 months for short term side effects rather than 1 month the GP seems to believe is a hard cut off for short term side effects. Likely because we know how vaccines work, we've had them for about 300 years. mRNA vaccines have been in development for almost 60 years, and adenoviral vector vaccines for the same period of time give or take. There's no reason to believe that these vaccines have effects outside the timescales being used. The entire world is actively monitoring the roll-out of these vaccines.
- merlincorey 5y ago
  I feel like you have missed my point still even though you quoted and responded to it. I quoted and linked to a scientific researcher who is looking for side effects on the time scale of 6 months. You then respond to tell me "we know how vaccines work... There's no reason to believe that these vaccines have effects outside the timescales being used" Okay, so is the time scale 1 month or 6 months?

3 ms·

My point isn't whether or not there is yet scientific evidence of vaccines causing an impact on menstruation, as opposed to the anecdotal evidence mentioned in

by merlincorey 5y ago

arcticbull 5y ago
Anecdotes aren't useful when the population set is billions. You will be able to find someone who took a COVID vaccine and then X happened. Car crashes, amputations, stillbirths, weddings, job promotions, winning the lottery even. That's just the law of large numbers. They're really not relevant to the discourse - quite damaging actually because of the outsize attention they receive. > My point is that scientific researchers seem to look at timescales of 6 months for short term side effects rather than 1 month the GP seems to believe is a hard cut off for short term side effects. Likely because we know how vaccines work, we've had them for about 300 years. mRNA vaccines have been in development for almost 60 years, and adenoviral vector vaccines for the same period of time give or take. There's no reason to believe that these vaccines have effects outside the timescales being used. The entire world is actively monitoring the roll-out of these vaccines.
- merlincorey 5y ago
  I feel like you have missed my point still even though you quoted and responded to it. I quoted and linked to a scientific researcher who is looking for side effects on the time scale of 6 months. You then respond to tell me "we know how vaccines work... There's no reason to believe that these vaccines have effects outside the timescales being used" Okay, so is the time scale 1 month or 6 months?